Place Ad
Contact Us

letter to the editor
Camera law hurts enforcement

I was taught in kindergarten that red means stop and green means go. We played a game called “Red Light, Green Light.” One of the kids would be at the front of the classroom, when he shouted “green light” we would run forward. When he shouted “red light” you had to stop. If you kept on going you were out and had to wait for the next game to start. We did not get a three second “yellow light” warning that a “red light” was coming.

Two and a half decades later all you have to do is slow down. When did red become “stop if you feel like it?” When the Tennessee State Legislature decided to prohibit the use of video and photographic evidence to enforce existing traffic laws they made obeying them a matter of courtesy.

If a law goes un-enforced does it still exist? If a vehicle runs a red light by turning right without stopping and causes a collision are they at fault? If an officer of the law wasn’t there to witness them running the red light did they in fact run it? Why do we accept potentially inaccurate eye-witness testimony when we have the option of video evidence?

Video evidence has been admissible in criminal cases for decades. So why has Tennessee banned the use of traffic cameras to enforce the right turn law? Because the people guilty of violating the law complained and complained loudly.

William Albrecht



News | Opinion | Sports | Business | Community | Schools | Obituaries | Announcements
Classifieds | Place Ad | Advertising | Contact Us | Archives | Search

© 2004-2017 farragutpress